Oh yeah - there are some coaches out there who just go for the bigger kids. They like the "intimidation" factor with bigger kids. They probably will pass on a Dustin Pedroia type player because they believe they will find an A-Rod type player who performs the same but is just bigger.
I'm not syaing it's right or wrong but that's the way they just think. If you look at a roster and everyone is six plus and you are 5'9 then you might want to go onto the next school.
quote:Originally posted by floridafan:
FOR THE RECORD THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PG, THIS IS BASEBALL IN GENERAL
Baseballdad1228 with all due respect, if your son is 6' plus legit it does not matter. If my kid was 6'2" I would be thrilled and height would never enter my mind again, check that one off, yep he's got height! If my kid runs a 6.8 I don't worry about speed, yep hes's fast, check that one off!
But, if your kid is a pitcher and 5'10" and he's 16, I bet you are hoping he hasn't hit his growth spurt yet!
Floridafan, I agree here. I think 6' is the magic number. I think the issue is, if a scout is looking through profiles (PG or otherwise), unless the rating is a 10, anyone under 6' will be overlooked by most. Not projectable. It's not really an issue for me whether the scouting agency verifies height and weight, so maybe I shouldn't be posting on this topic, but my issue is with the general view in the baseball world that taller is better. I don't think anyone can deny this outlook. Sure, shorter players can always make it. They just have to outshine everyone else. Why is it that way? Why would a 5'10" pitcher throwing 88 be less projectable than a 16 yr. old 6'3" pitcher throwing 88?
If this wasn't the case, it wouldn't matter whether someone was fudging the numbers. People fudge the numbers because they believe it will give them an advantage. They think that because they hear all the time that the taller kids are more "projectable". My general question is why does it matter how tall they are. There are shorter pitchers in MLB. They just have to be all that much better. Is there any evidence that shows that they are less durable? Or is it just an assumption?
I think the topic is worth discussing. My point about it could have been a bit more respectful would be if the following comments were not included.
"It really was fairly unimportant." - That not even close to being true
"Who's it hurting? No one" (I don't remember saying that) - It hurts the honest kids. That is like saying PED don't hurt the kids who don't take them. It's not a level playing/recruiting field.
Give a parent a hat and t-shirt if you don't want to pay someone for the regristration time. Kids alway trickle in to any camp or showcase please don't pretend this is difficult.
(I never said it was difficult and didn't "pretend" anything and it has nothing to do with paying someone)
Guess it’s just another case of how one words things and how others might take the same thing.
NP, It's not that big a deal, I'm not here to argue either. Sometimes it would be much better if I just kept quiet rather than giving an opinion.
"It really was fairly unimportant." - That not even close to being true
"Who's it hurting? No one" (I don't remember saying that) - It hurts the honest kids. That is like saying PED don't hurt the kids who don't take them. It's not a level playing/recruiting field.
Give a parent a hat and t-shirt if you don't want to pay someone for the regristration time. Kids alway trickle in to any camp or showcase please don't pretend this is difficult.
(I never said it was difficult and didn't "pretend" anything and it has nothing to do with paying someone)
Guess it’s just another case of how one words things and how others might take the same thing.
NP, It's not that big a deal, I'm not here to argue either. Sometimes it would be much better if I just kept quiet rather than giving an opinion.
PG, you guys had well over 400 kids attend the National Underclass event in December, right? I would think that would be a logistical nightmare to try and get an accurate height/weight measurement from that many people.
Could it be done? Sure but then again, those that are trying to game the system in the first place by saying they are 6'2" when they are 5'8" are going to figure out how to do it in that circumstance too.
JMO.
Could it be done? Sure but then again, those that are trying to game the system in the first place by saying they are 6'2" when they are 5'8" are going to figure out how to do it in that circumstance too.
JMO.
quote:Originally posted by bballman:quote:Originally posted by floridafan:
FOR THE RECORD THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PG, THIS IS BASEBALL IN GENERAL
Baseballdad1228 with all due respect, if your son is 6' plus legit it does not matter. If my kid was 6'2" I would be thrilled and height would never enter my mind again, check that one off, yep he's got height! If my kid runs a 6.8 I don't worry about speed, yep hes's fast, check that one off!
But, if your kid is a pitcher and 5'10" and he's 16, I bet you are hoping he hasn't hit his growth spurt yet!
Floridafan, I agree here. I think 6' is the magic number. I think the issue is, if a scout is looking through profiles (PG or otherwise), unless the rating is a 10, anyone under 6' will be overlooked by most. Not projectable. It's not really an issue for me whether the scouting agency verifies height and weight, so maybe I shouldn't be posting on this topic, but my issue is with the general view in the baseball world that taller is better. I don't think anyone can deny this outlook. Sure, shorter players can always make it. They just have to outshine everyone else. Why is it that way? Why would a 5'10" pitcher throwing 88 be less projectable than a 16 yr. old 6'3" pitcher throwing 88?
If this wasn't the case, it wouldn't matter whether someone was fudging the numbers. People fudge the numbers because they believe it will give them an advantage. They think that because they hear all the time that the taller kids are more "projectable". My general question is why does it matter how tall they are. There are shorter pitchers in MLB. They just have to be all that much better. Is there any evidence that shows that they are less durable? Or is it just an assumption?
The balls trajectory delievered from a guy 6.6 will be a tad different than the 5.10 guy. That would be my guess. At 6.6 the boys 'projectabilty" as midlle infielder is pretty much shot. So it pretty much cuts both ways
It appears that some believe that height and weight really matter to recruiters. If that is true, then....
a)
Recruiters look at lists, circle all those guys 6' and above, and then go out and recruit those guys who have been circled...
or
b)
They "see" some kid who stands out in the crowd because of their talent. They consult the list/bio's to see if it generally conforms to their own evaluation.
c)
combination of a and b. Coach looks at list beforehand especially at those positions of need. He never recruits anyone however that he has not personally seen. He also will not reject a guy who is under 6' who appears to play big.
a)
Recruiters look at lists, circle all those guys 6' and above, and then go out and recruit those guys who have been circled...
or
b)
They "see" some kid who stands out in the crowd because of their talent. They consult the list/bio's to see if it generally conforms to their own evaluation.
c)
combination of a and b. Coach looks at list beforehand especially at those positions of need. He never recruits anyone however that he has not personally seen. He also will not reject a guy who is under 6' who appears to play big.
.
'Bout time to break this ut again...
Both of mine are very tall...
....I am simply THRILLED to hear once again that mine will receiving a fistfull of "free passes"! Thank you! Thank you! Thank You! The universe be praised! May your camels shed all their fleas!
But I need help....
...I don't mean to be rude, but could you please tell me when this might occur? Given your sentiments I promised these passes to my sons a long, long time ago, and I have yet to hear from anyone. Can you believe that both are in college now and no coach, recruiter, or scout has "rolled over" for height yet?
Now, I don't mean to whine, but mine continue to lose out to players who are faster, or have developed ealier, or throw harder, or are more agile, or have better body types, or whose fathers played pro ball, or who have better genes. Don't they understand that mine get free passes? I tell my son's that their passes are coming but I have yet to see them, and I am beginning to lose my fatherly credability. Maybe someone could call the coaches, scouts or recruiters and remind them?
Or do we have to apply? If so, where is the application? Tallplayer.com? Skywardsubsidy.net? Skybaseball.org? Is there a deadline?
Please let us know if you have any information or suggestions.
In the meantime, while awaiting those "free passes" mine will continue to work hard and grind out a little success one day at a time as they have always done with the packages that they have been given...the good, the bad, and the ugly. They will foolishly continue to believe that passion, dedication, work ethic, attitude, and effort applied on a daily basis will do more for them than the "Free passes" you will soon be providing for all tall players.
Yours truly,
44
.
'Bout time to break this ut again...
Both of mine are very tall...
....I am simply THRILLED to hear once again that mine will receiving a fistfull of "free passes"! Thank you! Thank you! Thank You! The universe be praised! May your camels shed all their fleas!
But I need help....
...I don't mean to be rude, but could you please tell me when this might occur? Given your sentiments I promised these passes to my sons a long, long time ago, and I have yet to hear from anyone. Can you believe that both are in college now and no coach, recruiter, or scout has "rolled over" for height yet?
Now, I don't mean to whine, but mine continue to lose out to players who are faster, or have developed ealier, or throw harder, or are more agile, or have better body types, or whose fathers played pro ball, or who have better genes. Don't they understand that mine get free passes? I tell my son's that their passes are coming but I have yet to see them, and I am beginning to lose my fatherly credability. Maybe someone could call the coaches, scouts or recruiters and remind them?
Or do we have to apply? If so, where is the application? Tallplayer.com? Skywardsubsidy.net? Skybaseball.org? Is there a deadline?
Please let us know if you have any information or suggestions.
In the meantime, while awaiting those "free passes" mine will continue to work hard and grind out a little success one day at a time as they have always done with the packages that they have been given...the good, the bad, and the ugly. They will foolishly continue to believe that passion, dedication, work ethic, attitude, and effort applied on a daily basis will do more for them than the "Free passes" you will soon be providing for all tall players.
Yours truly,
.
Two six footers checking in at the PG Nationals:
quote:Originally posted by observer44:
....I am simply THRILLED to hear once again that mine will receiving a fistfull of "free passes"! Thank you! Thank you! Thank You! The universe be praised! May your camels shed all their fleas!
44, I'm a little offended by your sarcasm. No one said anyone gets a free pass for any reason! I have heard it stated numerous times that small guys can make it - they just have to stand out that much more. I have read numerous profiles on PG for a kid 6'3", that he has a "projectible frame". Never read that for a small guy.
I really don't think you can deny that kids that are taller are classified as more "projectable". I'm not saying that all you need is height. If you have two kids of equal talent, the taller kid will get the nod. Am I wrong? If I am totally off base that in if all else is equal, the taller kids get picked, tell me and I'll not say another word about it.
And I am talking more about higher level DI and MLB. I know that any D3 or JUCO will take a kid throwing 88-90 regardless of his height. I just don't think you can deny that taller players are considered more "projectable".
Come on 44. No call for that kind of attitude.
I really don't think you can deny that kids that are taller are classified as more "projectable". I'm not saying that all you need is height. If you have two kids of equal talent, the taller kid will get the nod. Am I wrong? If I am totally off base that in if all else is equal, the taller kids get picked, tell me and I'll not say another word about it.
And I am talking more about higher level DI and MLB. I know that any D3 or JUCO will take a kid throwing 88-90 regardless of his height. I just don't think you can deny that taller players are considered more "projectable".
Come on 44. No call for that kind of attitude.
I will agree with the taller is better in baseball, at least to a certain point, and if you are really tall, perhaps looking into basketball is a better avenue.
The problem I see at all levels is the fib/fudge factor. Pretty much everyone does this. It bothers me to see kids listed taller than they are, especially if it is in the 1+" range. Measurements under an inch don't bother me but when I see kids listed at 6'1 and I walk up to them and look them dead even in the eye (and I am only around 5'10"), it makes me laugh. Whether it's coaches or parents, or even player themselves doing this, it is a "lie" and has hurt every aspect of the game. It's a disease. I see this especially with throwing velocity mph numbers that get "talked" about.
At every level you see people lie about pitching velocity numbers. I get people all the time telling me that my son must be throwing around 80mph when in actuality he was throwing quite a bit less than that. They of course tell other people this and you know the rest of the story- Gee..., if he is throwing 80 then my kid must be be throwing like 75, etc, etc. The problem is the hype- overinflated realities. That is the reason why every little leaguer can throw 80 mph- it's becaus everyone runs around wild with overinflated hype and so then everyone has to overinflate their own son to not sound so bad.
This can be applied to every aspect including height. My son for instance is a hair under 5'10" (literally without socks or shoes) and yet he has friends who are a good inch shorter state their height as either the same or taller- even as much as 2" taller. that drives me crazy- they either have a very bad distortion of reality or are willing to lie if it gets their kid looked at over their best friends!
I heard this rumor this year about a kid who played with my son in basketball last year. This year both him and my son play on opposing teams and are the same height, weight, etc. The rumor was that this kid was now throwing the "ball down" (dunking the basketball). I laughed and said it was a fib. I then saw this kid before a game trying to throw the ball down. He was jumping fairly high, just barely able to draw iron with the edges of his fingers. I never actually saw him dunk the ball either before a game or in a game. All it is is hype and it hurts other players around them that are just as good or better.
People shouldn't lie. Perhaps, then the real truth would be that the real average height of a MLB player would be 1-2 less and we at our level wouldn't make such a big deal out of it!
The problem I see at all levels is the fib/fudge factor. Pretty much everyone does this. It bothers me to see kids listed taller than they are, especially if it is in the 1+" range. Measurements under an inch don't bother me but when I see kids listed at 6'1 and I walk up to them and look them dead even in the eye (and I am only around 5'10"), it makes me laugh. Whether it's coaches or parents, or even player themselves doing this, it is a "lie" and has hurt every aspect of the game. It's a disease. I see this especially with throwing velocity mph numbers that get "talked" about.
At every level you see people lie about pitching velocity numbers. I get people all the time telling me that my son must be throwing around 80mph when in actuality he was throwing quite a bit less than that. They of course tell other people this and you know the rest of the story- Gee..., if he is throwing 80 then my kid must be be throwing like 75, etc, etc. The problem is the hype- overinflated realities. That is the reason why every little leaguer can throw 80 mph- it's becaus everyone runs around wild with overinflated hype and so then everyone has to overinflate their own son to not sound so bad.
This can be applied to every aspect including height. My son for instance is a hair under 5'10" (literally without socks or shoes) and yet he has friends who are a good inch shorter state their height as either the same or taller- even as much as 2" taller. that drives me crazy- they either have a very bad distortion of reality or are willing to lie if it gets their kid looked at over their best friends!
I heard this rumor this year about a kid who played with my son in basketball last year. This year both him and my son play on opposing teams and are the same height, weight, etc. The rumor was that this kid was now throwing the "ball down" (dunking the basketball). I laughed and said it was a fib. I then saw this kid before a game trying to throw the ball down. He was jumping fairly high, just barely able to draw iron with the edges of his fingers. I never actually saw him dunk the ball either before a game or in a game. All it is is hype and it hurts other players around them that are just as good or better.
People shouldn't lie. Perhaps, then the real truth would be that the real average height of a MLB player would be 1-2 less and we at our level wouldn't make such a big deal out of it!
As someone whose son is in between those passed over sub 6 footers and not as tall as O44's free passers I'm stymied. I don't know if he's got an advantage or not. Please don't tell me he has to earn it. 
Being shorter is a bit of a disadvantage in the recruiting game. Being very tall is both an advantage and a disadvantage. Being fairly tall and athletic looking is an advantage and just like in the corporate world that advantage does tend to be a bit more long lasting than it should be.
One can list them as a bit taller to hopefully get looks as long as one doesn't go overboard but other than that people's biases aren't going to change anytime soon.
I remember being told by my twin brother's stepfather, who bore more than a faint resemblance to Fernando Valenzuela, that he lost his chance to make it to the bigs when they started going to the taller pitchers. That was almost 40 years ago.
Being shorter is a bit of a disadvantage in the recruiting game. Being very tall is both an advantage and a disadvantage. Being fairly tall and athletic looking is an advantage and just like in the corporate world that advantage does tend to be a bit more long lasting than it should be.
One can list them as a bit taller to hopefully get looks as long as one doesn't go overboard but other than that people's biases aren't going to change anytime soon.
I remember being told by my twin brother's stepfather, who bore more than a faint resemblance to Fernando Valenzuela, that he lost his chance to make it to the bigs when they started going to the taller pitchers. That was almost 40 years ago.
OK
We have logged in over 10,000 players for the Area Code games and Goodwill Series events since 1983.
Of course, I could tease you and perform a analysis on the 450 MLB players who played in our events, who were 6' or taller and weight 180 lbs or more. This stat would determine projection!!!!
Personally, it doesn't make any difference. The athlete can either play [prospect] or can't play [KP].
Two years ago in our Australia Goodwill Series ago a player from Florida 5'9 turned down $250,000 from the Twins. He was 6.7 in the 60 yard and threw 90 mph, played OF and SS.
Yes, he could play. So could our "All American" outside linebacker from Houston. He was 6'2 and 215.
Many years ago, I batted off the nephew of Dizzy Dean. He had his second finger on his pitching hand stretched, so he could throw a "harder" curve.
Maybe we should measure the fingers. Scouts have two difficulties.
Evaluate the "bat" and the "heart".
The scouts tease me, because I can evaluate the impact of the wood bat over the phone.
Bob Williams
We have logged in over 10,000 players for the Area Code games and Goodwill Series events since 1983.
Of course, I could tease you and perform a analysis on the 450 MLB players who played in our events, who were 6' or taller and weight 180 lbs or more. This stat would determine projection!!!!
Personally, it doesn't make any difference. The athlete can either play [prospect] or can't play [KP].
Two years ago in our Australia Goodwill Series ago a player from Florida 5'9 turned down $250,000 from the Twins. He was 6.7 in the 60 yard and threw 90 mph, played OF and SS.
Yes, he could play. So could our "All American" outside linebacker from Houston. He was 6'2 and 215.
Many years ago, I batted off the nephew of Dizzy Dean. He had his second finger on his pitching hand stretched, so he could throw a "harder" curve.
Maybe we should measure the fingers. Scouts have two difficulties.
Evaluate the "bat" and the "heart".
The scouts tease me, because I can evaluate the impact of the wood bat over the phone.
Bob Williams
quote:I remember being told by my twin brother's stepfather
CADad - Wouldn't it be easier to say that you remember being told by your stepfather?
quote:The scouts tease me, because I can evaluate the impact of the wood bat over the phone.
Bob Williams - there's a lot to be said for that. When listening to games on the Internet, I can usually tell when my son or someone else has hit the ball hard.
CD,
Might be easier but it wouldn't be correct. I guess the proper terminology would be "...his foster father...".
Might be easier but it wouldn't be correct. I guess the proper terminology would be "...his foster father...".
I can see height being a factor in baseball. Figure a 6'6" 1B is likely gonna have more reach than a 5'10" 1B, or even a 6'3" 1B. Maybe, some bad throws are still outs with the longer guy there, holding the bag. If all else is equal (fat chance), the taller player would have the edge.
As far as kids fluffing their heights... everyone knows many do. So, should a kid be honest or give himself a little boost? After all, nobody's checking.
As far as kids fluffing their heights... everyone knows many do. So, should a kid be honest or give himself a little boost? After all, nobody's checking.
As the father of a (currently) five niner, this is an issue we've dealt with forever. Pitcher has always been among the shorter players everywhere, and he has had to prove himself over and over again. Coaches who didn't believe he could bring it. Players (and especially players' parents unfortunately) who questioned his presence on a team.
But we taught him early on not to worry about your size, worry about your ability, your work ethic, your character, your grades. Those are things you CAN control, and those are the characteristics that the people who really matter are looking at. Sure enough, that's how it's panning out. He has heard over and over at PG and other events that the first question recruiters ask about a player is, "what's his GPA"? He has learned that he can use his size to his advantage by showing that he can play "bigger" than people expect just from looking at him. I think he even looks forward to proving them wrong.
My advice, don't sweat the size issue. From my son's personal experience, it does not matter. Certainly not to the four D I's that are interested in him.
Of course, he's still looking wistfully at my two 6' 7" cousins hoping someday that gene will kick in.
PD
But we taught him early on not to worry about your size, worry about your ability, your work ethic, your character, your grades. Those are things you CAN control, and those are the characteristics that the people who really matter are looking at. Sure enough, that's how it's panning out. He has heard over and over at PG and other events that the first question recruiters ask about a player is, "what's his GPA"? He has learned that he can use his size to his advantage by showing that he can play "bigger" than people expect just from looking at him. I think he even looks forward to proving them wrong.
My advice, don't sweat the size issue. From my son's personal experience, it does not matter. Certainly not to the four D I's that are interested in him.
Of course, he's still looking wistfully at my two 6' 7" cousins hoping someday that gene will kick in.
PD
Vicarious,
If my son were a bit under 6' we'd probably list him at 6'. It is a bit too easy for those whose sons are taller to take the moral "high ground".
If my son were a bit under 6' we'd probably list him at 6'. It is a bit too easy for those whose sons are taller to take the moral "high ground".
CADad, the best "pure athletes" I've ever known all seemed to be around 5'9", 5'10".
For those that think that the listed height and weight is a big deal, why do you think that?
Is it just the principle that some people are being dishonest? or Do you think that if someone else falsifies their information that it could cause your own sons to unfairly lose out on opportunites?
Is it just the principle that some people are being dishonest? or Do you think that if someone else falsifies their information that it could cause your own sons to unfairly lose out on opportunites?